Archive for category UPDATED POSTS

(UPDATED 090512) THE UGLY TRUTH ABOUT THE DEMOCRAT PARTY AND THE LIES THAT PERPETUATE THE HATE

THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IS THE PARTY THAT WANTS TO HELP ALL MINORITIES STRIVE TO BE SUCCESSFUL. ALL THE DEMOCRATS WANT IS TO MAKE AND KEEP YOU A SLAVE TO THEIR IDEOLOGY. CLICK THE PIC FOR THE INFORMATION FROM AMERICAN SPECTATOR..

This article in the American Spectator is right on the mark.  It’s about time that the Democrat party was exposed for what it is, a race baiting, class warfare, hate-mongering bunch that lies and lies just to bamboozle the ignorant and simple-minded folks who don’t know enough or have the resources to go and get the historical facts about how their party is THE party that stood int he way of equal rights for minorities and Blacks EVERY STEP OF THE WAY!  It is the Republican party that has always championed equal rights for all.  It was Abe Lincoln who freed the slaves and it was and IS the Republican party that has always stood up for those who couldn’t, AND NOT LIE ABOUT IT!  Click the pic for the story.

UPDATED 090512

Click HERE for another report on this subject.

These people hate God too….  All I can do is shake my head.  WOW!!  All of this on display for all of the world to see…….

More Democrat hate and vile.  Click here and watch the video and read the transcript for the full verbiage this pig used..

Advertisements

Leave a comment

DEMS ADMIT – OBAMA NOT QUALIFIED TO BE PRESIDENT

CLICK THE PIC FOR THE STORY….. WHO IS PAYING RESPECT HERE??

This is something I thought would never come to light.  After all the posting of the many articles on this subject, there is nothing more to be said.  Could it be that all of us who were reporting that Obama was not eligible for office, were right after all?  Well, its all for naught now.  He has so destroyed the national moral and Republican backbone, the current cadre of GOP Senators and Representatives, will not touch this with a 10 foot pole, as well as the conservative main stream media.  As with any 2nd Amendment issue, these media types recoil at the possibility of having to comment on these taboo issues.  They treat this and 2nd amendment issues like its a “3rd rail” and will not go near it.  For these reasons, conservative media, especially Fox news, will not touch on these issues.  All I can say to all of these people and corporations is, “shame on you”.  They “cherry pick” their issues and fail miserably on these.  Even Mark Levin won’t touch these.  I guess us “loons” are going to be proven right in the end and I for one will go out of my way to tell them “I TOLD YOU SO”.  That’s how I roll.  Click the pic for the story.

Leave a comment

IS THIS THE NEWS THAT WILL LEAD TO OBAMA’S DEFEAT? BORN IN KENYA? WHO’D UH THUNK IT?

TRUE? MAYBE SO……

Is this the HUGE information that Brietbart was referring to just before his passing?  Could be…  I guess Obama’s henchmen didn’t find this little piece of evidence when he sent them on their mission to find and suppress any and all historical data about him, ESPECIALLY if it confirms that he is not a natural-born American citizen.  I refer you to some of my earlier posts.  There are more, do a search for “birth” on this page and they will come up.

https://conservativeamericanvet.wordpress.com/2010/04/04/was-obama-born-in-kenya/

https://conservativeamericanvet.wordpress.com/2011/06/09/elecytronic-document-expert-interviewed-and-questioned-on-the-obama-birth-certificate-released-by-the-white-house/

https://conservativeamericanvet.wordpress.com/2011/09/17/sheriff-arpaios-posse-to-review-obama-birth-certificate/

http://www.wnd.com/2012/05/arpaio-reacts-to-latest-obama-kenya-connection/

1 Comment

(UPDATED 022112 WITH REPLY FROM CONGRESSWOMAN JAMIE HERERRA-BUETLER – UPDATED 121911 WITH REPLY FROM SENATOR PATTY MURRAY) (UPDATED WITH VIDEO) WASHINGTON REPRESENTATIVE JAIME HERRERA-BEUTLER AND SENATORS CANTWELL AND MURRAY VOTES AWAY OUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS / CONGRESSIONAL VOTING RECORD ON THE NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012

OUR FUTURE HOMES? MAYBE............

As this article outlines, this bill is so draconian you might as well tear up the Bill of Rights.  I am appalled that Congress would do such a thing.  It is now legal to use the might of the United States military against its own citizens in the USA.  All the government needs to do is use the laws and guidelines, the very same ones I have been highlighting on this web site, determine that whatever you are doing falls within the “you might be a terrorist if” guidelines published by the DHA, and the next thing you know, you have the DOD breaking down your door at 3am and hauling you off to jail because simply, they can….  That IS where we are now thanks to the very people who we sent to DC to protect our rights and I am so very disappointed in my Rep.  She is a Freshman and was specifically sent to NOT do what she just did.  Check the list below to see how your Rep voted.  It is truly a bleak and black day in and for America………………

Votes by Representative

Name Voted
Rep. Gary Ackerman [D, NY-5] Aye
Rep. Sandy Adams [R, FL-24] Aye
Rep. Robert Aderholt [R, AL-4] Aye
Rep. Todd Akin [R, MO-2] Aye
Rep. Rodney Alexander [R, LA-5] Aye
Rep. Jason Altmire [D, PA-4] Aye
Rep. Justin Amash [R, MI-3] Nay
Rep. Mark Amodei [R, NV-2] Aye
Rep. Robert Andrews [D, NJ-1] Aye
Rep. Steve Austria [R, OH-7] Aye
Rep. Joe Baca [D, CA-43] Aye
Rep. Michele Bachmann [R, MN-6] Abstain
Rep. Spencer Bachus [R, AL-6] Aye
Rep. Tammy Baldwin [D, WI-2] Nay
Rep. Lou Barletta [R, PA-11] Aye
Rep. John Barrow [D, GA-12] Aye
Rep. Roscoe Bartlett [R, MD-6] Aye
Rep. Joe Barton [R, TX-6] Aye
Rep. Karen Bass [D, CA-33] Nay
Rep. Charles Bass [R, NH-2] Aye
Rep. Xavier Becerra [D, CA-31] Nay
Rep. Dan Benishek [R, MI-1] Aye
Rep. Rick Berg [R, ND-0] Aye
Rep. Shelley Berkley [D, NV-1] Aye
Rep. Howard Berman [D, CA-28] Aye
Rep. Judy Biggert [R, IL-13] Aye
Rep. Brian Bilbray [R, CA-50] Aye
Rep. Gus Bilirakis [R, FL-9] Aye
Rep. Sanford Bishop [D, GA-2] Aye
Rep. Timothy Bishop [D, NY-1] Aye
Rep. Rob Bishop [R, UT-1] Aye
Rep. Diane Black [R, TN-6] Aye
Rep. Marsha Blackburn [R, TN-7] Aye
Rep. Earl Blumenauer [D, OR-3] Nay
Rep. Jo Bonner [R, AL-1] Aye
Rep. Mary Bono Mack [R, CA-45] Aye
Rep. Dan Boren [D, OK-2] Aye
Rep. Leonard Boswell [D, IA-3] Aye
Rep. Charles Boustany [R, LA-7] Aye
Rep. Kevin Brady [R, TX-8] Aye
Rep. Robert Brady [D, PA-1] Aye
Rep. Bruce Braley [D, IA-1] Nay
Rep. Mo Brooks [R, AL-5] Aye
Rep. Paul Broun [R, GA-10] Aye
Rep. Corrine Brown [D, FL-3] Aye
Rep. Vern Buchanan [R, FL-13] Aye
Rep. Larry Bucshon [R, IN-8] Nay
Rep. Ann Marie Buerkle [R, NY-25] Aye
Rep. Michael Burgess [R, TX-26] Nay
Rep. Dan Burton [R, IN-5] Nay
Rep. George Butterfield [D, NC-1] Aye
Rep. Ken Calvert [R, CA-44] Aye
Rep. David Camp [R, MI-4] Aye
Rep. John Campbell [R, CA-48] Nay
Rep. Francisco Canseco [R, TX-23] Aye
Rep. Eric Cantor [R, VA-7] Aye
Rep. Shelley Capito [R, WV-2] Aye
Rep. Lois Capps [D, CA-23] Aye
Rep. Michael Capuano [D, MA-8] Nay
Rep. Dennis Cardoza [D, CA-18] Aye
Rep. Russ Carnahan [D, MO-3] Aye
Rep. John Carney [D, DE-0] Aye
Rep. André Carson [D, IN-7] Nay
Rep. John Carter [R, TX-31] Aye
Rep. Bill Cassidy [R, LA-6] Aye
Rep. Kathy Castor [D, FL-11] Aye
Rep. Steven Chabot [R, OH-1] Aye
Rep. Jason Chaffetz [R, UT-3] Nay
Rep. Ben Chandler [D, KY-6] Aye
Rep. Judy Chu [D, CA-32] Nay
Rep. David Cicilline [D, RI-1] Aye
Rep. Hansen Clarke [D, MI-13] Nay
Rep. Yvette Clarke [D, NY-11] Nay
Rep. William Clay [D, MO-1] Nay
Rep. Emanuel Cleaver [D, MO-5] Nay
Rep. James Clyburn [D, SC-6] Nay
Rep. Howard Coble [R, NC-6] Abstain
Rep. Mike Coffman [R, CO-6] Nay
Rep. Steve Cohen [D, TN-9] Nay
Rep. Tom Cole [R, OK-4] Aye
Rep. Michael Conaway [R, TX-11] Aye
Rep. Gerald Connolly [D, VA-11] Aye
Rep. John Conyers [D, MI-14] Nay
Rep. Jim Cooper [D, TN-5] Aye
Rep. Jim Costa [D, CA-20] Aye
Rep. Jerry Costello [D, IL-12] Nay
Rep. Joe Courtney [D, CT-2] Aye
Rep. Chip Cravaack [R, MN-8] Aye
Rep. Rick Crawford [R, AR-1] Aye
Rep. Ander Crenshaw [R, FL-4] Aye
Rep. Mark Critz [D, PA-12] Aye
Rep. Joseph Crowley [D, NY-7] Aye
Rep. Henry Cuellar [D, TX-28] Aye
Rep. John Culberson [R, TX-7] Aye
Rep. Elijah Cummings [D, MD-7] Nay
Rep. Geoff Davis [R, KY-4] Aye
Rep. Susan Davis [D, CA-53] Aye
Rep. Danny Davis [D, IL-7] Nay
Rep. Peter DeFazio [D, OR-4] Nay
Rep. Diana DeGette [D, CO-1] Nay
Rep. Rosa DeLauro [D, CT-3] Nay
Rep. Jeff Denham [R, CA-19] Aye
Rep. Charles Dent [R, PA-15] Aye
Rep. Scott DesJarlais [R, TN-4] Nay
Rep. Ted Deutch [D, FL-19] Aye
Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart [R, FL-21] Abstain
Rep. Norman Dicks [D, WA-6] Aye
Rep. John Dingell [D, MI-15] Aye
Rep. Lloyd Doggett [D, TX-25] Aye
Rep. Bob Dold [R, IL-10] Aye
Rep. Joe Donnelly [D, IN-2] Aye
Rep. Michael Doyle [D, PA-14] Nay
Rep. David Dreier [R, CA-26] Aye
Rep. Sean Duffy [R, WI-7] Aye
Rep. Jeff Duncan [R, SC-3] Nay
Rep. John Duncan [R, TN-2] Nay
Rep. Donna Edwards [D, MD-4] Nay
Rep. Keith Ellison [D, MN-5] Nay
Rep. Renee Ellmers [R, NC-2] Aye
Rep. Jo Ann Emerson [R, MO-8] Aye
Rep. Eliot Engel [D, NY-17] Aye
Rep. Anna Eshoo [D, CA-14] Nay
Rep. Blake Farenthold [R, TX-27] Aye
Rep. Sam Farr [D, CA-17] Nay
Rep. Chaka Fattah [D, PA-2] Nay
Rep. Bob Filner [D, CA-51] Abstain
Rep. Stephen Fincher [R, TN-8] Aye
Rep. Michael Fitzpatrick [R, PA-8] Aye
Rep. Jeff Flake [R, AZ-6] Nay
Rep. Chuck Fleischmann [R, TN-3] Aye
Rep. John Fleming [R, LA-4] Aye
Rep. Bill Flores [R, TX-17] Aye
Rep. Randy Forbes [R, VA-4] Nay
Rep. Jeffrey Fortenberry [R, NE-1] Aye
Rep. Virginia Foxx [R, NC-5] Aye
Rep. Barney Frank [D, MA-4] Nay
Rep. Trent Franks [R, AZ-2] Aye
Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen [R, NJ-11] Aye
Rep. Marcia Fudge [D, OH-11] Nay
Rep. Elton Gallegly [R, CA-24] Aye
Rep. John Garamendi [D, CA-10] Aye
Rep. Cory Gardner [R, CO-4] Aye
Rep. Scott Garrett [R, NJ-5] Nay
Rep. Jim Gerlach [R, PA-6] Aye
Rep. Bob Gibbs [R, OH-18] Aye
Rep. Chris Gibson [R, NY-20] Aye
Rep. Gabrielle Giffords [D, AZ-8] Abstain
Rep. John Gingrey [R, GA-11] Aye
Rep. Louis Gohmert [R, TX-1] Aye
Rep. Charles Gonzalez [D, TX-20] Aye
Rep. Robert Goodlatte [R, VA-6] Nay
Rep. Paul Gosar [R, AZ-1] Nay
Rep. Trey Gowdy [R, SC-4] Nay
Rep. Kay Granger [R, TX-12] Aye
Rep. Tom Graves [R, GA-9] Nay
Rep. Samuel Graves [R, MO-6] Aye
Rep. Al Green [D, TX-9] Aye
Rep. Raymond Green [D, TX-29] Aye
Rep. Tim Griffin [R, AR-2] Aye
Rep. Morgan Griffith [R, VA-9] Nay
Rep. Raul Grijalva [D, AZ-7] Nay
Rep. Michael Grimm [R, NY-13] Aye
Rep. Frank Guinta [R, NH-1] Aye
Rep. Brett Guthrie [R, KY-2] Aye
Rep. Luis Gutiérrez [D, IL-4] Abstain
Rep. Janice Hahn [D, CA-36] Nay
Rep. Ralph Hall [R, TX-4] Aye
Rep. Colleen Hanabusa [D, HI-1] Aye
Rep. Richard Hanna [R, NY-24] Aye
Rep. Gregg Harper [R, MS-3] Aye
Rep. Andy Harris [R, MD-1] Nay
Rep. Vicky Hartzler [R, MO-4] Aye
Rep. Alcee Hastings [D, FL-23] Nay
Rep. Doc Hastings [R, WA-4] Aye
Rep. Nan Hayworth [R, NY-19] Aye
Rep. Joe Heck [R, NV-3] Aye
Rep. Martin Heinrich [D, NM-1] Nay
Rep. Jeb Hensarling [R, TX-5] Aye
Rep. Walter Herger [R, CA-2] Aye
Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler [R, WA-3] Aye
Rep. Brian Higgins [D, NY-27] Aye
Rep. James Himes [D, CT-4] Aye
Rep. Maurice Hinchey [D, NY-22] Nay
Rep. Rubén Hinojosa [D, TX-15] Nay
Rep. Mazie Hirono [D, HI-2] Aye
Rep. Kathleen Hochul [D, NY-26] Aye
Rep. Tim Holden [D, PA-17] Aye
Rep. Rush Holt [D, NJ-12] Nay
Rep. Michael Honda [D, CA-15] Nay
Rep. Steny Hoyer [D, MD-5] Aye
Rep. Tim Huelskamp [R, KS-1] Nay
Rep. Bill Huizenga [R, MI-2] Nay
Rep. Randy Hultgren [R, IL-14] Aye
Rep. Duncan Hunter [R, CA-52] Aye
Rep. Robert Hurt [R, VA-5] Nay
Rep. Jay Inslee [D, WA-1] Aye
Rep. Steve Israel [D, NY-2] Aye
Rep. Darrell Issa [R, CA-49] Aye
Rep. Jesse Jackson [D, IL-2] Nay
Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee [D, TX-18] Aye
Rep. Lynn Jenkins [R, KS-2] Aye
Rep. Eddie Johnson [D, TX-30] Abstain
Rep. Samuel Johnson [R, TX-3] Aye
Rep. Bill Johnson [R, OH-6] Aye
Rep. Henry Johnson [D, GA-4] Nay
Rep. Timothy Johnson [R, IL-15] Nay
Rep. Walter Jones [R, NC-3] Nay
Rep. Jim Jordan [R, OH-4] Aye
Rep. Marcy Kaptur [D, OH-9] Nay
Rep. William Keating [D, MA-10] Aye
Rep. Mike Kelly [R, PA-3] Aye
Rep. Dale Kildee [D, MI-5] Aye
Rep. Ronald Kind [D, WI-3] Aye
Rep. Steve King [R, IA-5] Aye
Rep. Peter King [R, NY-3] Aye
Rep. Jack Kingston [R, GA-1] Aye
Rep. Adam Kinzinger [R, IL-11] Aye
Rep. Larry Kissell [D, NC-8] Aye
Rep. John Kline [R, MN-2] Aye
Rep. Dennis Kucinich [D, OH-10] Nay
Rep. Raúl Labrador [R, ID-1] Nay
Rep. Doug Lamborn [R, CO-5] Aye
Rep. Leonard Lance [R, NJ-7] Aye
Rep. Jeff Landry [R, LA-3] Aye
Rep. James Langevin [D, RI-2] Aye
Rep. James Lankford [R, OK-5] Aye
Rep. Rick Larsen [D, WA-2] Aye
Rep. John Larson [D, CT-1] Aye
Rep. Thomas Latham [R, IA-4] Aye
Rep. Steven LaTourette [R, OH-14] Abstain
Rep. Robert Latta [R, OH-5] Aye
Rep. Barbara Lee [D, CA-9] Nay
Rep. Sander Levin [D, MI-12] Aye
Rep. John Lewis [D, GA-5] Nay
Rep. Jerry Lewis [R, CA-41] Aye
Rep. Daniel Lipinski [D, IL-3] Aye
Rep. Frank LoBiondo [R, NJ-2] Aye
Rep. David Loebsack [D, IA-2] Aye
Rep. Zoe Lofgren [D, CA-16] Nay
Rep. Billy Long [R, MO-7] Aye
Rep. Nita Lowey [D, NY-18] Aye
Rep. Frank Lucas [R, OK-3] Aye
Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer [R, MO-9] Aye
Rep. Ben Luján [D, NM-3] Nay
Rep. Cynthia Lummis [R, WY-0] Nay
Rep. Daniel Lungren [R, CA-3] Aye
Rep. Stephen Lynch [D, MA-9] Abstain
Rep. Connie Mack [R, FL-14] Nay
Rep. Carolyn Maloney [D, NY-14] Nay
Rep. Donald Manzullo [R, IL-16] Aye
Rep. Kenny Marchant [R, TX-24] Aye
Rep. Thomas Marino [R, PA-10] Aye
Rep. Edward Markey [D, MA-7] Nay
Rep. Jim Matheson [D, UT-2] Aye
Rep. Doris Matsui [D, CA-5] Nay
Rep. Kevin McCarthy [R, CA-22] Aye
Rep. Carolyn McCarthy [D, NY-4] Aye
Rep. Michael McCaul [R, TX-10] Aye
Rep. Tom McClintock [R, CA-4] Nay
Rep. Betty McCollum [D, MN-4] Nay
Rep. Thaddeus McCotter [R, MI-11] Aye
Rep. James McDermott [D, WA-7] Nay
Rep. James McGovern [D, MA-3] Nay
Rep. Patrick McHenry [R, NC-10] Aye
Rep. Mike McIntyre [D, NC-7] Aye
Rep. Howard McKeon [R, CA-25] Aye
Rep. David McKinley [R, WV-1] Aye
Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers [R, WA-5] Aye
Rep. Jerry McNerney [D, CA-11] Aye
Rep. Patrick Meehan [R, PA-7] Aye
Rep. Gregory Meeks [D, NY-6] Nay
Rep. John Mica [R, FL-7] Aye
Rep. Michael Michaud [D, ME-2] Nay
Rep. Candice Miller [R, MI-10] Aye
Rep. George Miller [D, CA-7] Nay
Rep. Bradley Miller [D, NC-13] Nay
Rep. Gary Miller [R, CA-42] Aye
Rep. Jeff Miller [R, FL-1] Aye
Rep. Gwen Moore [D, WI-4] Nay
Rep. James Moran [D, VA-8] Nay
Rep. Mick Mulvaney [R, SC-5] Nay
Rep. Christopher Murphy [D, CT-5] Nay
Rep. Tim Murphy [R, PA-18] Aye
Rep. Sue Myrick [R, NC-9] Abstain
Rep. Jerrold Nadler [D, NY-8] Nay
Rep. Grace Napolitano [D, CA-38] Nay
Rep. Richard Neal [D, MA-2] Nay
Rep. Randy Neugebauer [R, TX-19] Aye
Rep. Kristi Noem [R, SD-0] Aye
Rep. Richard Nugent [R, FL-5] Aye
Rep. Devin Nunes [R, CA-21] Aye
Rep. Alan Nunnelee [R, MS-1] Aye
Rep. Pete Olson [R, TX-22] Aye
Rep. John Olver [D, MA-1] Nay
Rep. William Owens [D, NY-23] Aye
Rep. Steven Palazzo [R, MS-4] Aye
Rep. Frank Pallone [D, NJ-6] Nay
Rep. William Pascrell [D, NJ-8] Aye
Rep. Edward Pastor [D, AZ-4] Aye
Rep. Ronald Paul [R, TX-14] Abstain
Rep. Erik Paulsen [R, MN-3] Aye
Rep. Donald Payne [D, NJ-10] Nay
Rep. Steven Pearce [R, NM-2] Aye
Rep. Nancy Pelosi [D, CA-8] Aye
Rep. Mike Pence [R, IN-6] Nay
Rep. Ed Perlmutter [D, CO-7] Aye
Rep. Gary Peters [D, MI-9] Nay
Rep. Collin Peterson [D, MN-7] Aye
Rep. Thomas Petri [R, WI-6] Aye
Rep. Chellie Pingree [D, ME-1] Nay
Rep. Joseph Pitts [R, PA-16] Abstain
Rep. Todd Platts [R, PA-19] Aye
Rep. Ted Poe [R, TX-2] Aye
Rep. Jared Polis [D, CO-2] Nay
Rep. Mike Pompeo [R, KS-4] Aye
Rep. Bill Posey [R, FL-15] Nay
Rep. David Price [D, NC-4] Nay
Rep. Tom Price [R, GA-6] Aye
Rep. Ben Quayle [R, AZ-3] Aye
Rep. Mike Quigley [D, IL-5] Nay
Rep. Nick Rahall [D, WV-3] Aye
Rep. Charles Rangel [D, NY-15] Nay
Rep. Tom Reed [R, NY-29] Aye
Rep. Dennis Rehberg [R, MT-0] Aye
Rep. Dave Reichert [R, WA-8] Aye
Rep. Jim Renacci [R, OH-16] Aye
Rep. Silvestre Reyes [D, TX-16] Aye
Rep. Reid Ribble [R, WI-8] Nay
Rep. Laura Richardson [D, CA-37] Aye
Rep. Cedric Richmond [D, LA-2] Nay
Rep. Scott Rigell [R, VA-2] Aye
Rep. David Rivera [R, FL-25] Aye
Rep. Martha Roby [R, AL-2] Aye
Rep. Phil Roe [R, TN-1] Nay
Rep. Michael Rogers [R, MI-8] Aye
Rep. Harold Rogers [R, KY-5] Aye
Rep. Michael Rogers [R, AL-3] Aye
Rep. Dana Rohrabacher [R, CA-46] Nay
Rep. Todd Rokita [R, IN-4] Nay
Rep. Thomas Rooney [R, FL-16] Aye
Rep. Peter Roskam [R, IL-6] Aye
Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen [R, FL-18] Aye
Rep. Dennis Ross [R, FL-12] Aye
Rep. Mike Ross [D, AR-4] Aye
Rep. Steven Rothman [D, NJ-9] Aye
Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard [D, CA-34] Nay
Rep. Edward Royce [R, CA-40] Nay
Rep. Jon Runyan [R, NJ-3] Aye
Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger [D, MD-2] Aye
Rep. Bobby Rush [D, IL-1] Nay
Rep. Timothy Ryan [D, OH-17] Nay
Rep. Paul Ryan [R, WI-1] Aye
Rep. Loretta Sanchez [D, CA-47] Abstain
Rep. Linda Sánchez [D, CA-39] Aye
Rep. John Sarbanes [D, MD-3] Nay
Rep. Steve Scalise [R, LA-1] Aye
Rep. Janice Schakowsky [D, IL-9] Nay
Rep. Adam Schiff [D, CA-29] Aye
Rep. Robert Schilling [R, IL-17] Aye
Rep. Jean Schmidt [R, OH-2] Aye
Rep. Aaron Schock [R, IL-18] Aye
Rep. Kurt Schrader [D, OR-5] Aye
Rep. Allyson Schwartz [D, PA-13] Aye
Rep. David Schweikert [R, AZ-5] Nay
Rep. Tim Scott [R, SC-1] Aye
Rep. David Scott [D, GA-13] Aye
Rep. Robert Scott [D, VA-3] Nay
Rep. Austin Scott [R, GA-8] Aye
Rep. James Sensenbrenner [R, WI-5] Aye
Rep. José Serrano [D, NY-16] Nay
Rep. Peter Sessions [R, TX-32] Aye
Rep. Terri Sewell [D, AL-7] Aye
Rep. Brad Sherman [D, CA-27] Aye
Rep. John Shimkus [R, IL-19] Aye
Rep. Heath Shuler [D, NC-11] Aye
Rep. William Shuster [R, PA-9] Aye
Rep. Michael Simpson [R, ID-2] Nay
Rep. Albio Sires [D, NJ-13] Aye
Rep. Louise Slaughter [D, NY-28] Nay
Rep. Christopher Smith [R, NJ-4] Aye
Rep. Adrian Smith [R, NE-3] Aye
Rep. Adam Smith [D, WA-9] Aye
Rep. Lamar Smith [R, TX-21] Aye
Rep. Steve Southerland [R, FL-2] Aye
Rep. Jackie Speier [D, CA-12] Nay
Rep. Fortney Stark [D, CA-13] Nay
Rep. Clifford Stearns [R, FL-6] Aye
Rep. Steve Stivers [R, OH-15] Aye
Rep. Marlin Stutzman [R, IN-3] Nay
Rep. John Sullivan [R, OK-1] Aye
Rep. Betty Sutton [D, OH-13] Aye
Rep. Lee Terry [R, NE-2] Aye
Rep. Bennie Thompson [D, MS-2] Nay
Rep. Glenn Thompson [R, PA-5] Aye
Rep. Michael Thompson [D, CA-1] Nay
Rep. William Thornberry [R, TX-13] Aye
Rep. Patrick Tiberi [R, OH-12] Aye
Rep. John Tierney [D, MA-6] Nay
Rep. Scott Tipton [R, CO-3] Nay
Rep. Paul Tonko [D, NY-21] Nay
Rep. Edolphus Towns [D, NY-10] Nay
Rep. Niki Tsongas [D, MA-5] Aye
Rep. Robert Turner [R, NY-9] Aye
Rep. Michael Turner [R, OH-3] Aye
Rep. Frederick Upton [R, MI-6] Aye
Rep. Christopher Van Hollen [D, MD-8] Nay
Rep. Nydia Velázquez [D, NY-12] Nay
Rep. Peter Visclosky [D, IN-1] Aye
Rep. Timothy Walberg [R, MI-7] Nay
Rep. Greg Walden [R, OR-2] Aye
Rep. Joe Walsh [R, IL-8] Nay
Rep. Timothy Walz [D, MN-1] Aye
Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz [D, FL-20] Aye
Rep. Maxine Waters [D, CA-35] Nay
Rep. Melvin Watt [D, NC-12] Nay
Rep. Henry Waxman [D, CA-30] Aye
Rep. Daniel Webster [R, FL-8] Aye
Rep. Peter Welch [D, VT-0] Nay
Rep. Allen West [R, FL-22] Aye
Rep. Lynn Westmoreland [R, GA-3] Aye
Rep. Edward Whitfield [R, KY-1] Aye
Rep. Frederica Wilson [D, FL-17] Aye
Rep. Addison Wilson [R, SC-2] Aye
Rep. Rob Wittman [R, VA-1] Aye
Rep. Frank Wolf [R, VA-10] Aye
Rep. Steve Womack [R, AR-3] Aye
Rep. Rob Woodall [R, GA-7] Nay
Rep. Lynn Woolsey [D, CA-6] Nay
Rep. John Yarmuth [D, KY-3] Nay
Rep. Kevin Yoder [R, KS-3] Aye
Rep. Bill Young [R, FL-10] Abstain
Rep. Donald Young [R, AK-0] Aye
Rep. Todd Young [R, IN-9]
MY LETTER TO MY REPS;

I am writing you to express my dismay at your vote concerning The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 2012.  Your main purpose in Congress, as stated by your Oath of Office was to protect the Constitution and the rights of the citizens of this nation.  Your AYE vote on this Bill is blatantly just the exact opposite.  While the poorly crafted language is seemingly aimed at persons inside the United States who are aiding identified terrorist organizations, the language is purposely vague so that it could be interpreted in very broad terms and conditions which can be “cherry picked” and used against the citizenry in most draconian ways.  This Bill effectively tears up the intent of The Bill of Rights as written by our Founding Fathers.  You know this and you still voted in favor of passage of this Constitution crushing legislation.  In my opinion, you are unfit to serve because you willingly violated your oath of office and violated the rights of the citizens of Washington State.  I will not in any way shape or form, support you in your upcoming election.  In fact I think you should be recalled immediately.  I anticipate that your response to this letter will include your rational for this betrayal to your oath and to the citizens you were supposed to represent.  In that light, it will be shallow and not acceptable as usual.

CLICK THE PIC FOR THE VIDEO

REPLY FROM SENATOR PATTY MURRAY:

Thank you for contacting me with your concerns regarding military detention.  It is good to hear from you.  As you know, in the aftermath of the attacks of September 11, 2001, the Bush administration devised a new detention system outside of established legal structures of the U.S. criminal justice system and military courts-martial. Through legislation and a series of high-profile Supreme Court rulings, both Congress and the federal judiciary took action to clarify and limit parts of the Bush administration’s detention programs.  Although President Obama has taken some important steps toward the fair and humane treatment of detainees, I believe much more work has yet to be done. I continue to support closing the detention center at Guantanamo Bay and the ability of the Administration to try terror suspects in the U.S. federal court system.  The federal courts are well-equipped to handle these complex and difficult cases—since 2006, federal courts have successfully tried over 300 terrorism suspects while military commissions have tried only three.  I strongly support giving our military and intelligence agencies the tools they need to protect our nation and our service members. I understand some evidence against detainees may be too sensitive to national security to be presented in civilian court or may be tainted due to harsh interrogation techniques.  Right now, the Secretary of Defense and the Attorney General can decide whether to use a military tribunal or a federal court.  I believe the Obama administration should continue to have the flexibility to decide on a case-by-case basis, and I opposed Republican amendments during consideration of the National Defense Authorization Act that would strip the President of this authority.

Please be assured that I will keep your views on this important topic in mind during the 112th Congress. If you would like to know more about my work in the United States Senate, please feel free to sign up for my weekly updates at http://murray.senate.gov/updates/. Thank you again for contacting me and please keep in touch.
Sincerely,

Patty Murray
United States Senator

(my comment; You see, she does not care about the Bill of Rights)

UPDATED 121911

Lawmaker obtains commitment to revisit detainee language

UPDATED 022112 REPLY FROM CONGRESSWOMAN JAIME HERRARA BEUTLER

February 14, 2012

Thank you for contacting me about Sections 1021 and 1022 of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).  It is an honor to represent the people of Southwest Washington, and it is important for me to hear from folks in our region.

I certainly understand your concerns about Sections 1021 and 1022 of the NDAA and how these sections impact our civil liberties and Constitutional rights.  I am a firm believer that your federal representative should take a proactive role in preserving your Constitutional rights.

I have not and will not support any legislation that would limit your Constitutional rights or allow American citizens to be detained under military authority and held without due process.  Please let me share with you why I believe the NDAA takes the proper steps to preserve your Constitutional rights and provide the President and our military with the tools they need to combat terrorism.

The NDAA reaffirms that the President may use “all necessary and appropriate force pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF)” against al Qaeda and the Taliban.  The AUMF was authorized following the September 11th terrorist attacks and had not been updated since it was originally sanctioned in 2001.  It is important to provide the President and our military with the resources they need to combat al Qaeda and the Taliban, and this bill accomplishes this goal by reaffirming current laws and without expanding presidential authority.

People had very valid and legitimate concerns about Section 1021 of the NDAA as it relates to the use of force.  Before voting for the NDAA I checked to make sure this legislation will not take away from or infringe upon your Constitutional rights.  The use of force does not apply to U.S. Citizens, in fact Section 1021, Subsection E which explicitly exempts U.S. citizens reads: (e) AUTHORITIES.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing law or authorities relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States, or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States.

Section 1022 of the NDAA clarifies procedures for how non-U.S. citizens linked to al Qaeda or the Taliban are to be detained.  Evidence must be presented that demonstrates a foreign national’s link to al Qaeda or the Taliban in order for the detainment to be legal. This section clarifies that terrorists apprehended by law enforcement agencies must be held under military custody.  However, Section 1022, Subsection B explicitly exempts U.S. citizens and legal residents.  It reads:(b) APPLICABILITY TO UNITED STATES CITIZENS AND LAWFUL RESIDENT       ALIENS.—

(1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS.—The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States. 

(2) LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS.—The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to a lawful resident alien of the United States on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States, except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States.

Our country continues to be under the very real threat of terrorism, and it is important to make sure our military is proper equipped to protect our citizens.  It is equally important for us to take steps to preserve and uphold our Constitutional rights.  The NDAA accomplish both of these goals.

Thank you again for contacting me on this important issue. I invite you to visit my website at www.HerrreraBeutler.house.gov for additional information or to sign up to be kept up to date on this important issue. Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can be of assistance.

 
Sincerely,

Jaime Herrera Beutler
Member of Congress

Leave a comment

(UPDATED 120111/120811) S.1867 WILL KILL DEMOCRACY AND AMERICA AS WE KNEW IT……..

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. Franklin's Contributions to the Conference on February 17 (III) Fri, Feb 17, 1775

I am asking all voting Americans to contact your Senators and demand that they not vote in favor of this legislation, “S.1867 – Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012”.  As much as I despise  the ACLU, they are right on this issue and we must not stand for this latest assault on the American Public.  You take the DHS publication on Extremism, and couple it with this legislation and  you will see that the forces inside the Federal Government that want to put us all in jail are still at work and is alive and well.  This could be the final shot across our bow that seals our fate.  If this language is left in this legislation and passes both the House and Senate and is signed into law, (which I have no doubt the current occupier of the WH will do) the great experiment called Democracy, that our Founding Fathers established, will be dead.  This is not an exaggeration or doom and gloom stuff.  If you don’t think so, you’re simply ignorant or not paying attention.  In either case, we’re all in trouble.    Click here and here for the details.

There is another issue with this legislation because it also covers the Tri-Care medical program that military retirees use.  It states;

SEC. 701. ANNUAL COST-OF-LIVING ADJUSTMENT IN ENROLLMENT FEES IN TRICARE PRIME.

(a) In General- Section 1097a of title 10, United States Code, is amended–

(1) by redesignating subsections (c), (d), (e), and (f) as subsections (d), (e), (f), and (g), respectively; and

(2) by inserting after subsection (b) the following new subsection (c):

`(c) Cost-of-living Adjustment in Enrollment Fee- (1) Whenever after September 30, 2012, the Secretary of Defense increases the retired pay of members and former members of the armed forces pursuant to section 1401a of this title, the Secretary shall increase the amount of the fee payable for enrollment in TRICARE Prime by an amount equal to the percentage of such fee payable on the day before the date of the increase of such fee that is equal to the percentage increase in such retired pay. In determining the amount of the increase in such retired pay for purposes of this subsection, the Secretary shall use the amount computed pursuant to section 1401a(b)(2) of this title. The increase in such fee shall be effective as of January 1 following the date of the increase in such retired pay.

`(2) The Secretary shall publish in the Federal Register the amount of the fee payable for enrollment in TRICARE Prime whenever increased pursuant to this subsection.’.

So what it saying is, if retirees get a COLA increase in their retirement checks,they will use Tri-Care to get it back…… This is the kind of back door, back stabbing legislation we Vets and Americans are sick of.  Those in congress who push this type of legislation must be voted out of office as we reform our REPRESENTATIVE form of government.

MY LETTER TO MY REPS ON THIS:

I am writing as your constituent in the 3rd Congressional district of Washington. I oppose S.1867 – Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, and am tracking it using OpenCongress.org, the free public resource website for government transparency and accountability. This legislation is a direct assault on the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and if you vote in favor of this Bill in its present form, you will be in violation of your oath of office and that will not go unnoticed. As Benjamin Franklin said on Feb 17th, 1775, “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” This struggle we find ourselves in now is not to be used as justification to tear our democracy asunder. We citizens are relying on you to protect our inviolate foundational tenets and GOD GIVEN RIGHTS. We demand you do so or you will most definitely find yourself voted out of office come your next election cycle. As this letter is being sent to all three of my Representatives in Congress, this legislation will not go before the House unless the Senate gives it an up vote. If it is passed in the Senate and goes to the House, my Representative in the House will be held to the same standard as my Senators. Our Democracy is in danger, do the right thing and vote no on this democracy killing legislation.

REPLY FROM CANTWELL:  (sort of..)

Thank you for contacting me regarding the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012. I appreciate hearing from you on this matter.

Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) introduced the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 on May 5, 2011.  This legislation was passed by the Senate Armed Services Committee by a vote of 26-0 on November 15, 2011.  The National Defense Authorization Act is enacted each fiscal year to specify the budget and expenditures of the U.S. Department of Defense.  The National Defense Authorization Act for 2012 includes numerous provisions that relate to the treatment of terrorism detainees.  One such provision requires that any detainee caught on U.S. soil must be remanded to the U.S. military for custody.  This provision is strongly opposed by the White House and the Department of Defense; both entities have stated that it will limit current options available to our counter-terrorism officials. However, the legislation also allows the Administration to waive the mandatory custody requirement.  The bill also provides for an exemption for any mandatory custody transfer that would interfere with ongoing civilian law enforcement surveillance or interrogation efforts.  Please be assured that I will keep your thoughts should I have the opportunity to vote on these or similar provisions. I am profoundly grateful for the service of our brave men and women in the armed services and for the sacrifices they have made to defend and preserve our great nation.  As such, we have an important responsibility to ensure that they have the tools and resources they need to successfully complete their mission and return home safe.  Please be assured that I will continue to work with my colleagues on behalf of the many soldiers in the state of Washington.

Thank you again for contacting me to share your thoughts on this matter.  You may also be interested in signing up for periodic updates for Washington State residents.  If you are interested in subscribing to this update, please visit my website at http://cantwell.senate.gov.  Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future if I can be of further assistance.

Sincerely,
Maria Cantwell
United States Senator

My Comment;

NOTICE HOW SHE DOES NOT TOUCH ON MY CONCERNS?  IS SHE RESPONSIVE TO OUR CONCERNS?  I SAY NO!

SENATE SAYS NO TO UDALL AMENDMENT that would have taken the worst out of this Bill.

UPDATED 120111

Vote on 1 Dec 11

 


 

UPDATED 120811

SENATOR CANTWELL RESPONSE

Leave a comment

(UPDATED 112811)THE EU IS ALL UPSET ABOUT THE USA AND OTHER INDUSTRIALIZED COUNTRIES DELAYING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CLIMATE CHANGE AGENDA

CLICK THE PIC FOR THE STORY

I find this BBC story very enlightening and disturbing at the same time.  It is a great indicator of how the rest of the world has been bamboozled by the UN and have bought into the global warming scam lock, stock and barrel.  For this reason alone, we must keep pressure on our Representatives to NOT buy into this scam in any way shape or form.  As you can read, there seems to be some negotiations or meetings going on that the media is not reporting. Gee, imagine that!!!!  Read this article and pass it on.

UPDATE 112811

MORE DATA

Leave a comment

(UPDATED 111711 WITH REPLY) MY LETTER TO JAIME HERRERA-BEUTLER ON THE GOP BLINKING FIRST ON TAXES:

HERRERA-BEUTLER

JAIME HERRERA-BEUTLER

I am reading increasing reports that the Dems are going to force the GOP to blink first, knuckle under and allow higher tax rates. This would be a bad move for the GOP. The GOP is not winning the PR campaign at all and that in itself is shameful.  The GOP is allowing the Dems to lie and bad mouth the GOP to the public and the GOP’ers just sit on their hands and allow it.  It’s no wonder the Dems are winning in the court of public opinion.  The GOP needs to get out front and tell the American Public what exactly they are doing to remedy the budget problems.  All we hear is that the GOP is the party of NO and are obstructionists. We Conservatives sent you and the other GOP Freshmen to DC to make sure the Dems do not get a free reign on this issue.  The GOP must hold the line against higher taxes and gutting the military.  I have a prediction; If the GOP does not hold the line, those that “blink” will be sent packing come their next election cycle.  I’m pretty sure about this one.  I urge you to do everything you can to prop-up your fellow GOPers and make sure they hold the line.  Do not allow the GOP to be brow-beaten into submission when the voters want them to save this nation, not be part of the problem.  The Speaker must not cave and he must hold the rest of the GOP in the House accountable. I do not write my Senators anymore because they do not listen and are not respondent to the conservative constituents.  I hope the GOP does not go down the same path.

REPLY 111711

Thank you for contacting me regarding raising taxes.  It is an honor to represent the people of Southwest Washingtonand I appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts with me.

Getting our economy moving again is the best way to balance our budget and the way the federal government helps is to create an environment where jobs can grow.  Fair taxation, modest regulation and less government spending create that environment.  Raising taxes in the middle of a recession will harm job growth and ensure more family providers, recent graduates and near-retirees remain jobless.  Over 50 percent of “$250,000 and above” who are looked at for increased tax rates are small business owners and investors. Attempts to tax the rich are often misaligned, because what it ends up doing is hitting our small business owners – the mom and pop shops.

For example, the common misconception is that higher tax brackets only affect wealthy individuals.  But the higher tax brackets also include “pass through entities”.  Small businesses must be part of the debate on tax reform – the majority of them do not pay corporate taxes, but they pay taxes on their firm’s “pass through” income on their individual return.  “Pass-through” entities are businesses whose taxes are passed through to the owners, who report the income or loss on their own personal income tax returns.

When more people are working, they are paying more in taxes, which will reduce the federal deficit.  Creating private sector – not government sector – jobs is one of my top priorities, and keeping taxes low to help employers create them is a great start.  Government should let entrepreneurs and investors do what they do best and grow businesses.  This is a terrible time to raise taxes on job-creators.

Thank you again for contacting me on this important issue. I invite you to visit my website at www.HerreraBeutler.house.gov for additional information or to sign up to be kept up to date on these issues. Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can be of further assistance.

Sincerely,

Jaime Herrera Beutler
Member of Congress

Leave a comment

(UPDATED 111711) OBAMA’S BLM IS GOING TO CUT YOUR ACCESS TO PUBLIC LANDS FOR SHOOTING AND HUNTING

IT WON'T STOP HERE......Click the pic for the story.

As I have been reporting since I started this website, the Lib/Progressives are hell-bent on doing everything they can to restrict your gun rights in one way or another.  In this case, through regulations, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) will severely restrict access to public land for the purpose of any shooting activity, to include hunting.  In the proposed regulation, this paragraph is the Coup de grâce to the shooting public; “When the authorized officer determines that a site or area on BLM-managed lands used on a regular basis for recreational shooting is creating public disturbance, or is creating risk to other persons on public lands; is contributing to the defacement, removal or destruction of natural features, native plants, cultural resources, historic structures or government and/or private property; is facilitating or creating a condition of littering, refuse accumulation and abandoned personal property is violating existing use restrictions, closure and restriction orders, or supplementary rules notices, and reasonable attempts to reduce or eliminate the violations by the BLM have been unsuccessful, the authorized officer will close the affected area to recreational shooting.”  In reading this, it is very evident that whomever authored it was trying very hard to tie up every situation they could think of that could be used as justification to shut down recreational shooting or even hunting.  At this point, I don’t have any information that would indicate what type of violations these would be, if any.  But be warned, I wouldn’t be surprised if the Feds didn’t make it at least a class c felony, which in turn would make you a felon and take away your gun rights.  Remember, these people are after you and your guns.  They will take and make every advantage they can.   The National Wildlife Foundation, Cabela’s and the Wildlife and Hunting Heritage Conservation Council are trying to fight this issue but so far it has not received much attention.  Click HERE for their paper on this.

UPDATED 111711

Did the BLM back down?  Maybe……  Click HERE for info

Leave a comment

(UPDATED 111711 – 010612) H.R.822 – National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011

HOW CAN THIS TAKE A HARD LEFT ON US?

As I read this Bill, on the surface it seems fairly benign and well intentioned, but as I apply a few brain cells of thought to this, I find a few problems with it.  First off, and the most obvious problem, is the very real possibility that this legislation could be “modified” in the future in such a way that it actually becomes detrimental to our rights under the 2nd Amendment.  If you read the text, the 2nd is specifically and conspicuously mentioned, however, this means nothing as this legislation, as with all others is subject to change and there is no reason why we should believe that it wouldn’t be changed in ways that it wasn’t originally planned.  Everyone should know as well as I do that once the Feds get their grubby hands on ANYTHING, it gets screwed up in ways that always flow in the direction of the prevailing political winds.  This legislation is no different.  Realistically, it comes down to a level of trust, and right now I have ZERO faith and trust in the Federal Government, in its current state.  This could prove to be the “Trojan Horse” the anti-gunners are looking for.  Secondly, there will be an issue of standards of training because each state has established their own level of competency each applicant must meet in order to be issued a CWP (Concealed Weapon Permit).  For example, say one state does not require anything but a clean background in order to be issued a CWP, but another state requires a minimum level of training in order to be permitted to carry concealed in their state.  How is the Federal Government going to reconcile this disparity?  If I was in a State Legislature that requires a higher level of competency, I would not be happy about having a bunch of people walking around packing that may or may not be competent to carry.  As a citizen of that state I would be concerned for the same reasons.  Does this mean that this function would no longer be the responsibility of the states?  What about states rights?  This Legislation walks all over that issue.  And thirdly, how would this law, if enacted play into the UN Inter-American Arms Treaty being negotiated right now by the Secretary of State in the Obama Administration? With the Feds in control of these permits, there could be provisions in this treaty, if ratified, that would have serious effects and require the government to enact draconian conditions on the issuance of these permits, thusly putting foreign governments in control of our 2nd Amendment.  In conclusion, I am opposed to this legislation for the reasons outlined above.

MY NOTE:

I sent this as a letter to my Reps on this subject.  So should you.

RESPONSE FROM MARIA CANTWELL 102111

Thank you for contacting me with your comments regarding concealed carry laws and reciprocity agreements. I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue.
Under existing law, the authority to issue concealed carry permits falls within state jurisdiction. Washington State is a “shall-issue” state meaning that residents who meet the necessary criteria (e.g. at least 21 years of age) shall be issued a concealed carry permit upon request. Currently, each state decides which out-of-state permits they will honor. This is done via reciprocity and recognition agreements. In Washington State, the concealed carry permits of other states receive reciprocity only if the licensing state: (1) does not issue permits to individuals under the age of 21, and (2) requires mandatory fingerprint-based background checks of criminal and mental health history (RCW 9.41.073).
As you know, Senator John Thune (SD) introduced Senate Amendment 1618 (S.Amdt. 1618) to the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (S. 1390) on July 17, 2009. This amendment would have preempted reciprocity agreements, including those of Washington State. In effect, it would have created a nationalized concealed carry permit set at the lowest issuance standard. Washington State would be forced to grant reciprocity to any permit holder, even if the issuing state did not meet the basic safety and suitability requirements of Washington State law. I opposed this amendment which was not agreed to by the Senate on July 20, 2009.
As your Senator, you can be assured that I will work to protect the legitimate rights of law-abiding American gun-owners, while continuing to support responsible gun control legislation to reduce crime and make our communities safer. I believe both of these goals are important and can be simultaneously accomplished through common-sense gun laws and stricter enforcement of existing laws. Thank you again for contacting me to share your thoughts on this matter. You may also be interested in signing up for periodic updates for Washington State residents. If you are interested in subscribing to this update, please visit my website at http://cantwell.senate.gov. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future if I can be of further assistance.
Sincerely,
Maria Cantwell
United States Senator

For future correspondence with my office, please visit my website at
http://cantwell.senate.gov/contact/index.html

MY NOTE:  She did not address my concerns adequately and did not mention the UN Inter-American Arms Treaty

UPDATED

010612   (OUT OF ORDER)

Reply from Maria Cantwell

Thank you for contacting me with your comments regarding concealed carry laws and reciprocity agreements. I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue.
Under existing law, the authority to issue concealed carry permits for firearms falls within state jurisdiction. Washington State is a
“shall-issue” state, meaning that residents who meet the necessary criteria (e.g. at least 21 years of age) shall be issued a concealed
carry permit upon request. Currently, each state decides what out-of-state permits it will honor. This is done via reciprocity and
recognition agreements. In Washington State, the concealed carry permits of other states receive reciprocity only if the licensing state: (1) does not issue permits to individuals under the age of 21, and (2) requires mandatory fingerprint-based background checks of criminal and mental health history (RCW 9.41.073).  On February 18, 2011, Representative Cliff Stearns (R-FL) introduced the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011 (H.R. 822) in the U.S. House of Representatives. This proposed legislation was passed out of the House of Representatives and has been referred to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, where it is awaiting further review. If enacted, this legislation would amend the federal criminal code to authorize a person with a valid permit to carry a concealed firearm issued by one state to carry a concealed handgun in another state in accordance with that state’s restrictions. The legislation would not apply to those prohibited from possessing, transporting, or receiving firearms under federal law.  As your Senator, you can be assured that I will work to protect the legitimate rights of law-abiding American gun-owners, while continuing
to support responsible gun control legislation to reduce crime and make our communities safer. I believe both of these goals are important and can be simultaneously accomplished through common-sense gun laws and stricter enforcement of existing laws.
Thank you again for contacting me to share your thoughts on this matter. You may also be interested in signing up for periodic updates for Washington State residents. If you are interested in subscribing to this update, please visit my website at http://cantwell.senate.gov. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future if I can be of further assistance.
Sincerely,
Maria Cantwell
United States Senator

For future correspondence with my office, please visit my website at
http://cantwell.senate.gov/contact/

 

UPDATED 102611

HR 822 PASSES COMMITTEE HURDLE

EMAIL FROM NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR GUN RIGHTS 111711:

I was right to be concerned.Not only was H.R. 822 — the Trojan horse gun control bill — passed out of the House of Representatives this evening, it was passed with an amendment that would open the door to federal biometric requirements for concealed firearms permits and a federally-administered database of all permit holders.

Only 7 Republican Members of Congress stood against federal overreach in the concealed carry process by opposing this bill (you can see how your Representative voted here:http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2011/roll852.xml).

The bill was amended this afternoon by ostensibly “pro-gun” Republicans to require a study be done on the ability of law enforcement officers to verify the validity of out-of-state concealed firearm permits.

You and I both know what this means. A year from now, the study will come back stating that the only way to “verify” out-of-state permits is through federally-mandated biometric requirements for concealed firearm permits and Congress “must” create a nationally administered database of all concealed weapon permit holders.

One of my biggest concerns about this bill — the lists of gun owners a permit process creates — should send shivers down your spine: Imagine Eric Holder and the BATFE with a national database of concealed carry permit holders.

It’s bad enough to have those lists exist at a state level. Once Eric Holder and his cronies find a way to request that list from a state, they’ll do it — all the in the name of “implementing H.R. 822.”

The legislation now moves to the Harry Reid-run Senate, where companion legislation is expected to be introduced in the coming days. I have no doubt that the anti-gunners in the Senate will use this as an opportunity to make H.R. 822 even worse.

What troubles me most about this battle is the institutional gun lobby has been leading the charge for this legislation. In fact, they’ve been brow-beating Members of Congress who dare to question the consequences of passing such a broad, overreaching piece of legislation.

Republican Congressman Justin Amash (MI-03) fought back against the institutional gun lobby for its support of H.R. 822:

“It’s remarkably bold of the National Rifle Association to send out false and misleading messages regarding H R 822, an unconstitutional bill that improperly applies the Commerce Clause to concealed carry licensing. I would support legislation that gets the federal government out of the way of states that want to recognize other states’ concealed carry permits. In contrast, H R 822 will hurt gun rights by conceding broad new authority to the federal government to override state sovereignty.

Gun rights advocates have fought hard to prevent liberal abuse of the Commerce Clause that would restrict gun rights… I am disappointed that the NRA has decided to put its own interests ahead of the interests of gun owners. Fortunately, many other gun rights groups rightly oppose H R 822.”

Please call your Senator at (202) 224-3121 and tell them you want to keep the government’s hands off your permit and that you oppose federal intrusion into the concealed weapons permit process.

Thank you for taking action to keep the federal government out of the concealed firearms permit system.

For Freedom,

  
   Dudley Brown
   Executive Director



The National Association for Gun Rights is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, single-purpose citizens’ organization dedicated to preserving and protecting the Constitutionally protected right-to-keep-and-bear-arms through an aggressive program designed to mobilize public opposition to anti-gun legislation. The National Association for Gun Rights’ mailing address is P.O. 7002, Fredericksburg, VA 22404. They can be contacted toll-free at 1-877-405-4570. Its web address is www.NationalGunRights.org/

You can read our privacy policy here.

Not produced or e-mailed at taxpayer expense.


To help the National Association for Gun Rights grow, pleaseforward this to a friend.

To view this email as a web page, please click this link: view online.

Help fight gun control. Donate to the National Association for Gun Rights!

1 Comment

(UPDATED 102711) LETTER TO MY WA. STATE REPS BENTON, HARRIS AND PROBST REGARDING HR 2044

WHY SHOULD THE WASHINGTON STATE TRIBES HAVE A MONOPOLY ON SLOTS AND WHY IS GOVERNOR GREGOIRE PROTECTING THEM?

Before you and the rest of the Washington State Legislature think about raising taxes and cutting services, you need to pass HR2044.  I know how much money this HR would bring into the state coffers and your action or inaction on this Bill will prove to your constituency whether you are serious about reducing the deficit, or just punishing your constituents with your shortsightedness on this issue by raising taxes and cutting essential services.  If you do not act to get this Bill passed, you will not have my support during your next election cycle.

UPDATE 102711

REPLY FROM REPRESENTATIVE  TIM PROBST:

Thank you for taking the time to send me this note.

HB 2044 was introduced in the 2011 session, and would allow electronic scratch ticket machines in nontribal gambling establishments.  It was introduced very late in the legislative session, and did not move out of the State Government & Tribal Affairs Committee.

I do not have a problem with this bill — I think that it would be perfectly fine to allow these machines in nontribal gambling establishments.  However, I do not sit on any of the committees that this bill will go through, and so I will not have a hand in the process unless and until the bill reaches the House floor.  In the event that the bill does reach the floor in 2012, I will keep your thoughts in mind as I vote.

You can track the bill’s progress here: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=2044&year=2011.

Thanks again for your note; please keep in touch.  As you know, our nation is in its worst economic emergency since the Great Depression.  We all need to look out for one another during these tough economic times.  Please do whatever you can to look out for your neighbors, and please feel free to contact me anytime.

Tim


State Government & Tribal Affairs contact info;

113 Joel M. Pritchard Bldg., P.O. Box 40600, Olympia, WA 98504-0600
Committee Hearings & Bill Information: (360) 786-7126
Legislative Hotline Operators: 1-800-562-6000
Committee Members

Representative Room Phone
Hunt, Sam (D) Chair LEG 438B (360) 786-7992
Appleton, Sherry (D) Vice Chair LEG 132F (360) 786-7934
Taylor, David (R) * MOD A 205 (360) 786-7874
Overstreet, Jason (R) ** MOD A 102 (360) 786-7980
Alexander, Gary (R) LEG 426B (360) 786-7990
Condotta, Cary (R) LEG 122B (360) 786-7954
Darneille, Jeannie (D) LEG 436B (360) 786-7974
Dunshee, Hans (D) (360) 786-7804
Hurst, Christopher (D) LEG 132D (360) 786-7866
McCoy, John (D) LEG 132A (360) 786-7864
Miloscia, Mark (D) LEG 437A (360) 786-7898

2 Comments

(UPDATED 101211) HOUSE COMMITTEE GIVES THE NOD TO 3 FREE TRADE AGREEMENTS

THAT GIANT SUCKING SOUND YOU HEAR WILL BE MORE JOBS HEADING SOUTH..... CLICK THE PIC FOR THE STORY

I am highlighting this because I remember when the last free trade agreement was made and I remember what happened………If memory serves, when NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) was signed, everyone in DC said that it would prove to be a boom to business here in the USA.  Well, it really didn’t work out that way.  Seems to me, it worked out great for everyone EXCEPT the USA.  The next thing we saw was the tail lights of our manufacturing base heading south of the border, and now they want to extend that into Central America in what is called CAFTA (Central American Free Trade Agreement).  It is my opinion that this is just more bad decision making from DC when we cannot stand another hit like we took with NAFTA.  If this happens, I just don’t see how corporations are going to be lulled back into the States to rebuild the jobs lost when they left to begin with.  Now they will build factories all the way down through Central America.  How does that help the US Workers?  It seems by this article that they are more concerned about the workers in Columbia.  Why would that be, other than the obvious?   The logic is supposed to be that we care about the poor workers of the indigenous companies in those countries covered by CAFTA, but could it be that when US companies move their operations down there, they don’t want the bad PR associated with worker mistreatment?  Gee, could be…..  These agreements in my opinion should not happen.  I predict we will suffer for it, not benefit………

UPDATE 101211

This plan has passed the House.  It is expected to pass the Senate easily.  I predict  more US industry heading south….Say goodbye to more jobs!

Leave a comment

(UPDATED 102011) RESPONSE FROM SENATOR MARIA CANTWELL AND CONGRESSWOMAN HERRERA REGARDING CUTTING MILITARY BENEFITS

SENATOR MARIA CANTWELL (D-WA) She needs to be unemployed........badly....

I am posting this verbatim including the salutation because it makes a good point.  If these letters were really read, the reply wouldn’t read like this.  Also it doesn’t even address my concerns……

“Dear Mr. Usaf Retired,

Thank you for contacting me regarding military pay. I appreciate hearing from you on this important matter and sincerely regret the delayed response.  During the budget negotiations for fiscal year 2011 there were concerns that if the government shut down due to lack of a federal budget our soldiers would lose their paychecks.  I was very concerned with this possibility; no matter what happens regarding the federal budget the brave men and women in our Armed Forces should never need to worry about if they will receive a paycheck to support their families.  To address this, I joined with Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) in cosponsoring the Ensuring Pay for Our Military Act of 2011 (S. 721).  This legislation would have required the Secretary of the Treasury to pay any service-member who performs active duty service during a government shutdown.  Thankfully, Congress was able to pass a budget which ensured our men and women in uniform continue to receive their paychecks.  A principal responsibility of the U.S. Congress under the Constitution is to provide for the national defense.  I take this responsibility very seriously, and I am committed to and continue to support legislative efforts to maintain the effectiveness and readiness of the U.S.’s Armed Forces by raising our soldiers’ quality of life, improving housing conditions for military personnel and their families, and modernizing our force capabilities to effectively meet future threats.   I have long fought to ensure that military service members have resources and tools necessary to safely and successfully accomplish the missions they are given.  I believe that it is essential to guarantee that the brave men and women of our Armed Forces know that the benefits promised to them, including their basic pay will always be there.   Thank you again for contacting me to share your thoughts on this matter.  You may also be interested in signing up for periodic updates for Washington State residents.  If you are interested in subscribing to this update, please visit my website at http://cantwell.senate.gov.  Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future if I can be of further assistance.

Sincerely,
Maria Cantwell
United States Senator

For future correspondence with my office, please visit my website at
http://cantwell.senate.gov/contact/index.html   ”

HERRERA-BEUTLER

HERRERA-BEUTLER

October 17, 2011

Dear Mr. Usaf Retired,

Thank you for contacting me about military benefits. It is an honor to represent the people of Southwest Washington, and I appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts with me. I am committed to ensuring our military will continue to have the tools they need to do their job both now and in the future.  I am also committed to making sure our servicemen and servicewomen and veterans will continue to have access to the services they need and benefits they have been promised. America’s military and military veterans are integral to our country’s independence, and I recognize the many sacrifices our military makes to uphold our country’s freedoms and safety.  I am grateful for our military’s sacrifices, and it concerns me when people do not show military members and veterans the respect and thanks they deserve.  America’s military has been strong in battle, unwavering in loyalty, and unmatched in honor and I commend them for their unparalleled bravery and service to this country. Since coming to Washington D.C. I have focused on getting our country’s fiscal house in order.  Our nation is facing a $14 trillion deficit, and we have many difficult decisions in front of us.  I believe there are places to cut wasteful spending throughout our federal budget, including the Department of Defense, but I will not support cuts to services and benefits for our active military and veterans. Congress passed the Budget Control Act of 2011 to raise our nation’s debt limit, in order to meet our nation’s obligations.  The Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction is a bipartisan, 12 member committee that was created as part of the Budget Control Act of 2011.  The committee is tasked with making recommendations to cut wasteful spending by $1.2 trillion and finding solutions to our nation’s debt problems.  The committee’s recommendation to Congress is due on November 23, 2011. I appreciate your thoughts on this challenging issue, and I will keep them in mind as I learn more about the committee’s recommendations.  I am optimistic that Congress will continue to find bipartisan solutions to our debt crisis. Rest assured, I will not support a plan that balances our budget on the backs of our military and veterans. Thank you again for contacting me on this important issue.

I invite you to visit my website at www.HerrreraBeutler.house.gov for additional information or to sign up to be kept up to date on this important issue. Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can be of assistance

Member of Congress

Sincerely,

Jaime Herrera Beutler

Leave a comment

(UPDATED 092711) GM – (GOVERNMENT MOTORS) TRACKING DRIVERS WITH ON-STAR EVEN IF YOU STOPPED YOUR ACCOUNT

JUST SAY NO!

Yes, I knew this was the case, that is why when recently I needed a newer vehicle, I bought a Ford.  I will never own a vehicle with On-Star or any other tracking system that the government has a hand in.  GM is saying that they maintain tracking data to include speed, and any other such data that is recorded in what is being called ” a black box for cars” that all these On-Star equipped vehicles have.  Where I go and how I go anywhere is no business of the government, especially without a search warrant, which I am sure would not be obtained in this case since the data is so easily obtained.  In my opinion, GM is totally corrupt and should have been allowed to go belly up.  Click the pic for the story.  And oh, by the way, That Progressive insurance ad that says that if you are a great driver, you get really good rates.  All you have to do is plug this in to your OBD 2 port to get the discount.  What “this” is, is a data recorder.  And what it records is all the data that your car’s computer tracks like speed, braking and other such stuff.  Be warned, that if you are involved in an accident and you have this device on your car, Progressive WILL use the data obtained to deny coverage if they find any data that could indicate you were speeding or anything else that they may find as grounds to not pay.  You’ve been warned………….  Flo Lies……

UPDATE 092711

On-Star says, Opps, Just Kidding!!  They backtrack on this plan after a revolt by Congress, Customers and others.  They say they will shut it off, but when was the last time any government entity told the truth?  (Yes, GM is a government entity)  I don’t believe a word of it.  How can that claim be tested?  I would like to know and have someone check it out.

Leave a comment

(UPDATED 091911-092311-092611) IS SENATOR PATTY MURRAY and SENATOR MARIA CANTWELL LOOKING TO BITE THE HAND THAT FEEDS HER AND CUT BENEFITS FOR MILITARY RETIREES?

CLICK HER PIC TO WRITE HER

CLICK THE PIC TO WRITE HER

I think this is a very appropriate question for her, after all she is on the Committee for Veteran Affairs….  I do not trust her one inch.  She needs to understand in no uncertain terms that meddling with veteran benefits will lead to their ousting in the Senate.  If the retirement benefits are gutted, like the Libs want, the military will sink to a level of mediocrity not seen since before WWII.   No one will stay in because of the meager retirement benefits and there will be little or no brain trust.  This would be catastrophic for the USA and no one in their right mind should even think about balancing the budget on the backs of the very people who VOLUNTARILY put themselves in harm’s way to protect this great land.  When America turns in back on the Veterans, Then Vets will turn their backs on America.  Click here for the story….

MY LETTER TO MY REPRESENTATIVE AND SENATORS and yes I sent it to Speaker John Boehner also;

I am appalled by the fact that Congress is looking to balance the federal budget on the backs of the very people who make and keep this country strong.  I initially VOLUNTEERED for military service back in 1975.  At that time the Federal Government had a contract with me stating that if I hung in for at least 20 years, I would have free medical and a retirement check to count on.  Since then the Federal Government has “re-written” this contract many times, always at the expense of the GI’s.  This habit of always sticking it to the military people who are career oriented and working for at least 20 years to be eligible for benefits when Congress has to only serve 5 years in order to become vested is outrageous.  You sit in your office every day while me and tens of thousands like me, strapped a weapon on every day, willingly putting themselves in harm’s way every working day of our career and stood the line between the USA and the people who wish to do it harm. I did this as a Police Officer in the Air Force for 20+ years and now Congress is looking to cut my benefits and/or increase my premiums.  Couple this and the unbelievably high taxes I pay and this will just about put me at the poverty level.  I vehemently oppose any change in military retiree or future retiree’s benefits.  It is my prediction that if Congress guts the military retirement benefits, you will be placing the United States Military and the DOD as a whole on the path to ruin.  If cuts to retirement benefits are going to happen, then by reason, all monetary enlistment enticements must be cut also. These acts alone will cause the retention rates and enlistment rates to plummet.  After all, who would volunteer to do a job that you could easily get killed doing, for little or no benefits or security for your family?  I sure wouldn’t, and neither will anyone else.  There are plenty of areas within the DOD that can be trimmed that are incredibly wasteful.  I suggest starting there and other bloated federal offices that are in need of going on a diet, such as the IRS, the Post office, TSA and other incredibly wasteful departments before you bring the axe down on the very people who make your job possible.  In conclusion, you need to be aware of the fact that there will be electoral repercussions if you pursue this course. I for one will work tirelessly for your opponent during your next election cycle.  I will tirelessly inform your constituents of your actions against the veterans and retired military community.  Your actions will not go un-noticed. I will post each and every vote you cast on this subject and I will endeavor to teach your constituents how to follow your votes via the several watch dog web sites at our disposal.  It doesn’t matter if you are a Liberal Democrat of a Conservative Republican, if you turn your back on the vets, we will reciprocate in-kind.  You will not have our support or votes.

UPDATED 091911

NOT ONLY THE RICH WILL PAY MORE UNDER OBAMA’S PLAN….

REPLY FROM CONGRESSWOMAN Jaime Herrera Beutler: 092011

September 20, 2011

Thank you for contacting me regarding civilianizing veteran’s pensions and the military benefits package.   It is an honor to represent the people of Southwest Washington and I appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts with me. America’s soldiers and veterans have made great sacrifices to protect our country’s freedoms and safety.  I am grateful for their sacrifices, and I am committed to finding solutions to the problems facing our veterans and their families today. Given the current economic conditions, I fully recognize that many veterans are having a difficult time making ends meet.  Many veterans relying on these programs live on fixed incomes and very tight budgets.  For them, every dollar of hard-earned benefits counts in meeting basic expenses, attaining quality of life, and building a better future for themselves and those who depend on them. While no government program is immune from cuts in this fiscally trying time, I am not willing to ask veterans to take a disproportionate share of the burden.  As Congress, the administration, and the Pentagon work to make good on the debt ceiling deal, they should focus on responsibly reducing wasteful military spending in a way that bolsters our economy without endangering our national security or cutting benefits to to active duty military and veterans.  I place a high priority upon protecting the interests of our service members and it is essential that we keep our promises to those men and women in uniform, as well as the loved ones they leave behind.  I appreciate your comments and will work hard to make sure a fair and equitable solution that protects our nation’s veterans is found as we tackle our national debt and move the United States forward.

Thank you again for contacting me on this important issue. I invite you to visit my website at www.HerrreraBeutler.house.gov for additional information or to sign up to be kept up to date on this important issue. Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can be of assistance.
Sincerely,

Jaime Herrera Beutler
Member of Congress

SENATOR MARIA CANTWELL RESPONSE:  No doubt a form letter…

UPDATED 092611

SENATOR PATTY MURRAY  RESPONSE:  No doubt a form letter and she dodges the question and issue;

Thank you for contacting me about funding for military benefits.   I appreciate hearing from you on this important matter and sincerely regret the delayed response.Government has a responsibility to spend taxpayers’ dollars wisely, but it also has a responsibility to provide certain services and guarantees to the American people. I take both of these very seriously. To ensure that we have the ability to defend our borders, maintain our infrastructure, educate our children, and more, it is imperative that we keep our financial house in order. A principal responsibility of the U.S. Congress under the Constitution is to provide for the national defense.  I take this responsibility very seriously, and I am committed to and continue to support legislative efforts to maintain the effectiveness and readiness of the U.S.’s armed forces by raising our soldiers’ quality of life, improving housing conditions for military personnel and their families, and modernizing our force capabilities to effectively meet future threats.I am  profoundly grateful for the service of America’s veterans and for the sacrifices they have made to defend and preserve our great nation. Please be assured that I will continue to work with my colleagues on behalf of the many veterans in the State of Washington.

Thank you again for contacting me to share your thoughts on this matter.  You may also be interested in signing up for periodic updates for Washington State residents.  If you are interested in subscribing to this update, please visit my website at http://cantwell.senate.gov.  Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future if I can be of further assistance.

Sincerely,
Maria Cantwell
United States Senator

My comments;  As you can read here, as usual she does not address my concerns and only offers a weak response and weak support.  She must be defeated in 2012.  I will vote for a soup can, over her……..

 

Thank you for contacting me regarding the recently created Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction, of which I am a co-chair.  I appreciate hearing from you about your priorities for this process.  As you may know, on August 2, 2011, President Obama signed the Budget Control Act of 2011 into law after its bipartisan passage through Congress. Following an initial down payment of almost $1 trillion in deficit reduction through cuts to discretionary spending, this legislation created a Joint Select Committee tasked with identifying further deficit reduction of approximately $1.5 trillion.  In the event the Committee is unable to produce a plan to meet that amount, immediate across-the-board cuts will be enacted that will come from both defense and non-defense spending. In accordance with the legislation, Committee members were to be appointed by Majority and Minority Leaders in each chamber of Congress.  On August 10, 2011, I was asked by Senate Majority Leader Reid to co-chair the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction. I agreed to accept this role because I take the goals of this Committee seriously and because I believe that it is time for members of both parties to work together to improve our nation’s financial future.  Currently, I am working with my House and Senate colleagues from both sides of the aisle to address our national debt and deficit in a balanced and bipartisan manner.  I know we need to make the tough choices that put our country on a more sustainable fiscal track but I also know that we must protect the middle class, seniors, and the most vulnerable who are struggling mightily in today’s economy. I do not want to pass an unsustainable debt along to my own grandchildren and will be working tirelessly toward a bipartisan plan that reduces our deficit without neglecting the need for investment in areas that help to spur economic growth, create jobs, and promote our country’s long-term competitiveness. I appreciate hearing from you about your priorities for the Joint Select Committee and I will certainly keep the suggestions of Washingtonians in mind as I work with my colleagues to address our fiscal situation. Please continue to pass on your thoughts, as they will help me and my fellow Committee members as we take on this challenge.  You can also visit http://deficitreduction.gov for further information about the work of the Joint Select Committee, and if you would like to know more about my work in the Senate, please sign up for my weekly updates at http://murray.senate.gov/updates.
Sincerely,

Patty Murray
United States Senator

 

2 Comments

(UPDATED 101112 WITH REPLIES) S.968 PROTECT IP Act of 2011

My letter to Senator Cantwell:

I am writing as your constituent in the 3rd Congressional district of Washington. I oppose S.968 – PROTECT IP Act of 2011, and am tracking it using OpenCongress.org, the free public resource website for government transparency and accountability. This is nothing more than a maneuver to silence the dissenting voices of your constituency.

Sincerely,

This letter was a reply from the office of Sen. Maria Cantwell [D, WA] on September 14, 2011.

From the Office of Senator Cantwell

SENATOR MARIA CANTWELL. CLICK THE PIC TO GO TO INFORMATION ABOUT HER VOTING.

Thank you for contacting me about the internet streaming of copyrighted material. I appreciate hearing from you on this issue, and sincerely regret the delayed response.
On May 12, 2011, Senator Leahy (D-VT) introduced S. 968, the Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property (PROTECT IP) Act. Under current federal law, U.S. law enforcement officials and holders of copyrights, trademarks, and patents, have limited legal remedies available to combat internet websites that are registered in foreign countries but operate in the United States by selling products, services, and/or content that violates U.S. intellectual property law. If enacted, the proposed legislation would create an expedited process for the Department of Justice and intellectual property rights holders to shut down through a court order these websites by targeting, the owners and operators of the Internet site, if known, or the domain name registrant associated with the Internet site.  The proposed legislation would require the Department of Justice to demonstrate to the Court that the Internet site accessed by the domain name is “dedicated to infringing activities.” Such a website would have no other significant use other than engaging in, enabling, or facilitating infringing activities. Once a court order is issued,domestic operators of domain name servers would be required to effectively prevent online users from accessing the infringing Internet site. Providers of online information location tools would be required to take technically feasible and reasonable measures to remove or disable access to such an Internet site, including not providing a hypertext link. Finally, financial institutions involved in online transactions and Internet advertising companies would be prohibited from doing business with any Internet site subject to a Court order under the
legislation. Intellectual property rights holders can take Internet payment and advertising companies to court if they believe these
companies are not complying with the law. This legislation was reported out of the Judiciary Committee on July 22, 2011, and is awaiting action by the full Senate. While I am supportive of the goals of the bill, I am deeply concerned that the definitions and the means by which the legislation seeks to accomplish these goals will hurt innovation and threaten online speech. Please be assured that I will keep your thoughts in mind should I have the opportunity to vote on this or similar legislation regarding intellectual property rights.  Thank you again for contacting me to share your thoughts on this matter. You may also be interested in signing up for periodic updates for Washington State residents. If you are interested in subscribing to this update, please visit my website at http://cantwell.senate.gov. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future if I can be of further assistance.

Sincerely,
Maria Cantwell
United States Senator
For future correspondence with my office, please visit my website at
http://cantwell.senate.gov/contact/index.html

MY COMMENT:  I was trying to remember when was the last time I heard a DemocRAT speak the truth……..Well, its been a very long time and I don’t think that this is the truth either……..

REPLY FROM REP. HERRERA BEUTLER;

HERRERA-BEUTLER

HERRERA-BEUTLER

Thank you for writing me regarding restrictions on the internet. It is
an honor to represent the people of Southwest Washington, and I
appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts with me.

I want to be clear that I support a hands-off approach to the internet.
I am concerned that burdensome regulations will slow down economic
growth. The internet has led to vast improvements for American
businesses and day-to-day life, and I want to see the internet continue
to flourish and create opportunities for all Americans.

Thank you again for contacting me on this important issue. I invite
you to visit my website at http://www.herrerabeutler.house.gov
for additional information or to
sign up to be kept up to date on these issues. Please do not hesitate
to contact me if I can ever be of assistance.

Sincerely,
Jaime Herrera Beutler
Member of Congress

Leave a comment

(UPDATED 102011) RETIRED MILITARY MEDICATIONS CO-PAYS TO INCREASE 1 OCT –

I just found out that my co-pays will be going up with Tri-Care for all my meds, that is, unless I sign up for Tri-Care Home Delivery.  Here are my letters to my elected officials;

300018 Sen. Maria Cantwell [D, WA]

“I am retired Air Force and I have Tri-Care as my and my wife’s health insurance. We have just received news that my co-pays for my medications are going up across the board, unless I sign up for Tri-Care home delivery system.  I am not at all happy about this on many levels.  1.  You were supposed to NOT allow the government to balance the books on the back of the retired GI’s.  2. It has been demonstrated time and time again that the government cannot and does not perform at the same level as the private sector.  There is no doubt in my mind that my medications will get “toyed with” by some bureaucrat with a mandate to save as much money as possible.  And that they will do so at the expense of us retired military.  The drugs will come from the lowest bidder and I have zero confidence in proper handling and storage of these sensitive compounds.  I can guarantee that you will not have my vote if this course of action by Tri-care is not stopped and reversed.  Your own website states “Maria has been a tireless advocate of ensuring our nation’s veterans have access to quality affordable health care. In 2005, when news broke that veterans were going to be charged higher annual fees and copays, Maria took to the floor of the U.S. Senate and fought for $2.7 billion in veterans’ health care funding. Maria believes military retirees should be allowed to take a tax deduction for their TRICARE supplemental premiums. In 2003, Maria worked hard to block premature closures of VA health facilities across the nation with Senator Patty Murray. She pushed for a measure requiring a full study on the impact of closing any facility before any action was taken, and also supported a measure requiring a Congressional review before a facility could be scaled-back or closed. Maria has sought to make veterans health care a mandatory program, with funds set aside based on inflation and the size of the veterans population, as part of the Veterans Health Care Funding Guarantee Act.”  What happened to your support here?  We GI’s made it possible for you to have your job, you need to stand up for us now that we have served our country honorably. I want a reply to this message as I post all my correspondence to my ELECTED Officials.  I am sure my readers will want to read your reply verbatim.”

MARIA CANTWELL’S REPLY: 092011

Thank you for contacting me about funding for military benefits.   I appreciate hearing from you on this important matter and sincerely regret the delayed response. Government has a responsibility to spend taxpayers’ dollars wisely, but it also has a responsibility to provide certain services and guarantees to the American people. I take both of these very seriously. To ensure that we have the ability to defend our borders, maintain our infrastructure, educate our children, and more, it is imperative that we keep our financial house in order.  A principal responsibility of the U.S. Congress under the Constitution is to provide for the national defense.  I take this responsibility very seriously, and I am committed to and continue to support legislative efforts to maintain the effectiveness and readiness of the U.S.’s armed forces by raising our soldiers’ quality of life, improving housing conditions for military personnel and their families, and modernizing our force capabilities to effectively meet future threats. I am profoundly grateful for the service of America’s veterans and for the sacrifices they have made to defend and preserve our great nation. Please be assured that I will continue to work with my colleagues on behalf of the many veterans in the State of Washington.

Thank you again for contacting me to share your thoughts on this matter.  You may also be interested in signing up for periodic updates for Washington State residents.  If you are interested in subscribing to this update, please visit my website at http://cantwell.senate.gov.  Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future if I can be of further assistance.

Sincerely,
Maria Cantwell
United States Senator

For future correspondence with my office, please visit my website at
http://cantwell.senate.gov/contact/index.html

MY NOTE: OBVIOUSLY A FORM LETTER.  NICE PERSONAL REPLY…..SHE IS GETTING MORE LIKE EX-CONGRESSMAN BRAIN BAIRD ALL THE TIME..

300076 Sen. Patty Murray [D, WA]

Thank you for contacting me regarding the recently created Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction, of which I am a co-chair.  I appreciate hearing from you about your priorities for this process. As you may know, on August 2, 2011, President Obama signed the Budget Control Act of 2011 into law after its bipartisan passage through Congress. Following an initial down payment of almost $1 trillion in deficit reduction through cuts to discretionary spending, this legislation created a Joint Select Committee tasked with identifying further deficit reduction of approximately $1.5 trillion.  In the event the Committee is unable to produce a plan to meet that amount, immediate across-the-board cuts will be enacted that will come from both defense and non-defense spending. In accordance with the legislation, Committee members were to be appointed by Majority and Minority Leaders in each chamber of Congress. On August 10, 2011, I was asked by Senate Majority Leader Reid to co-chair the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction. I agreed to accept this role because I take the goals of this Committee seriously and because I believe that it is time for members of both parties to work together to improve our nation’s financial future.  Currently, I am working with my House and Senate colleagues from both sides of the aisle to address our national debt and deficit in a balanced and bipartisan manner.  I know we need to make the tough choices that put our country on a more sustainable fiscal track but I also know that we must protect the middle class, seniors, and the most vulnerable who are struggling mightily in today’s economy. I do not want to pass an unsustainable debt along to my own grandchildren and will be working tirelessly toward a bipartisan plan that reduces our deficit without neglecting the need for investment in areas that help to spur economic growth, create jobs, and promote our country’s long-term competitiveness. I appreciate hearing from you about your priorities for the Joint Select Committee and I will certainly keep the suggestions of Washingtonians in mind as I work with my colleagues to address our fiscal situation. Please continue to pass on your thoughts, as they will help me and my fellow Committee members as we take on this challenge.  You can also visit http://deficitreduction.gov for further information about the work of the Joint Select Committee, and if you would like to know more about my work in the Senate, please sign up for my weekly updates at http://murray.senate.gov/updates.
Sincerely,

Patty Murray
United States Senator

412486 Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler [R, WA-3]

Thank you for contacting me about military benefits. It is an honor to represent the people of Southwest Washington, and I appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts with me. I am committed to ensuring our military will continue to have the tools they need to do their job both now and in the future.  I am also committed to making sure our servicemen and servicewomen and veterans will continue to have access to the services they need and benefits they have been promised. America’s military and military veterans are integral to our country’s independence, and I recognize the many sacrifices our military makes to uphold our country’s freedoms and safety.  I am grateful for our military’s sacrifices, and it concerns me when people do not show military members and veterans the respect and thanks they deserve.  America’s military has been strong in battle, unwavering in loyalty, and unmatched in honor and I commend them for their unparalleled bravery and service to this country. Since coming to Washington D.C. I have focused on getting our country’s fiscal house in order.  Our nation is facing a $14 trillion deficit, and we have many difficult decisions in front of us.  I believe there are places to cut wasteful spending throughout our federal budget, including the Department of Defense, but I will not support cuts to services and benefits for our active military and veterans. Congress passed the Budget Control Act of 2011 to raise our nation’s debt limit, in order to meet our nation’s obligations.  The Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction is a bipartisan, 12 member committee that was created as part of the Budget Control Act of 2011.  The committee is tasked with making recommendations to cut wasteful spending by $1.2 trillion and finding solutions to our nation’s debt problems.  The committee’s recommendation to Congress is due on November 23, 2011. I appreciate your thoughts on this challenging issue, and I will keep them in mind as I learn more about the committee’s recommendations.  I am optimistic that Congress will continue to find bipartisan solutions to our debt crisis. Rest assured, I will not support a plan that balances our budget on the backs of our military and veterans. Thank you again for contacting me on this important issue. I invite you to visit my website at www.HerrreraBeutler.house.gov for additional information or to sign up to be kept up to date on this important issue. Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can be of assistance.
Sincerely,

Jaime Herrera Beutler
Member of Congress

1 Comment

(UPDATED 090311) OPERATION FAST AND FURIOUS – HOW FAR UP DOES THE CONSPIRACY TO COVER-UP GO?

Click the pic for the story. I am starting to smell blood in the water............

This is a completely legitimate question that must be answered.  I am old enough to remember the Nixon years and the Watergate scandal.  Nixon resigned because he got caught being involved in the cover-up of the break-in of the DNC office at the Watergate complex in DC.  It seems to me that the Watergate scandal was insignificant, compared to this scandal that involves the death of a Law Enforcement Officer with guns the ATF knowingly allowed to go into the hands of Mexican drug cartels, not to mention just the fact that the ATF allowed the unlawful sale of guns, knowing they were going over the border into Mexico.  And oh, by the way, the Feds tried to use this “illegal” trafficking as an excuse to violate our 2nd Amendment rights…….The GOP needs to grab onto this like a rabid Pit-bull and shake it till Obama shakes loose……..

UPDATED 090311

Will this bring down Obama?

1 Comment

(UPDATED 101611) MONUMENT TO DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING DEDICATED IN WASHINGTON DC

CLICK THE PIC FOR THE STORY. THE STATUE LOOKS LIKE A COMMIE LOOKING STERNLY DOWN ON HIS PEOPLE....... IT'S TERRIBLE.....

There could not be a better person to honor in DC than Dr. King.  He was a great man and this nation is better for having him.  So when I heard about the monument, I thought it was a really great thing,  until I saw it……  Before reading anything about the sculpture, I thought it looked “funny”.  It reminded me of the monuments we were used to seeing all over the Communist nations, extolling the great leaders of their communist/socialistic/Marxist countries.  Then I read on, and it all made perfect sense.  This thing was carved by an “artist” in Communist China and it does resemble Mao and whats with the Asian eyes? .     If I was an African-American, I would be so insulted by this monument, I would force its removal and call for a “re-do”, having a new monument carved by a someone who for one, is not communist, and two, will not embellish the image of Dr. King to look other than what he was, a noble and brave man.  Why couldn’t or didn’t they contract this out to African-American artists?  I am offended by this monument being made by the communist Chinese.   I have a tremendous amount of respect for the man and I feel that he was one of the few true hero’s America has ever produced.  He was a great man whose memory and accomplishments deserve much, much better than this.   Click here for more pics.

UPDATE 101611

More recent information.

1 Comment

(UPDATED 012612) IS THERE IS A “TRAIN WRECK” IN THE WORKS FOR THE COAL INDUSTRY AND ITS WORKERS?

CLICK THE PIC FOR THE STORY

The EPA has been rattling its sword over this issue for some time and it looks like it this plan is going to come to fruition unless more level-headed people stop this from happening.  Click HERE for the report.

UPDATE 012612

EPA REG SHUTTING DOWN COAL FIRED POWER PLANTS

Leave a comment

(UPDATED WITH REPLY 082311) LETTER TO WA. SEC. OF STATE SAM REED ASKING ABOUT ILLEGAL ALIEN VOTING 2012 GENERAL ELECTION

CLICK THE PIC TO GO TO THE WASHINGTON STATE SECRETARY OF STATE WEB SITE

I am writing you as a concerned citizen regarding the recent announcement from The Department of Homeland Security stating that illegal aliens will no longer be deported simply due to their undocumented status.  While DHS was careful to state that illegal’s who have committed some sort of crime (other than entering this country illegally) will be processed as usual, illegal aliens who are guilty of nothing more than just being here in the United States, will not be deported.  With all this being said, I am very concerned over the possibility that illegal aliens may be able to cast ballots in the next general election cycle in 2012.  I would like to ask you, as Washington State is a vote by mail state, how is the Office of Secretary of State going to ensure that only ballots from bonified US Citizens are counted and what safeguards are going to be in place at the locations where the Washington State ballots are going to be counted that would prevent the possibility of fraudulent ballots being counted?

Thank you for whatever information you could provide that would help ease the minds of the citizens of this state.

REPLY 082311:

“Thank you for taking the time to contact Secretary Reed regarding your concerns about illegal aliens casting ballots.  Secretary Reed asked me to respond to you on his behalf.  In a vote by mail system like outs, a person only receives a ballot if he or she is registered to vote.  As such, I think the root of your question is really about protecting the integrity of voter registration.  Secretary Reed strongly believes that only eligible citizens should register to vote and participate in our elections.  This idea is fundamental to protecting the integrity of our elections system and ensuring fair elections for all.  Here are few points to keep in mind with regard to voter registration and citizenship:

  • There is no list of citizens.  The federal government nor any other agency does not maintain a list of citizens, so we cannot screen the list of voters against a list of citizens.  If there was a list of citizens, then Washington likely would be confirming citizenship already.
  • Only one state in the country, Arizona, requires proof of citizenship in order to register.  Arizona has been requiring proof of citizenship in order to obtain a driver’s license since 1996.  And even Arizona is required to accept federal voter registration forms, which do not require proof of citizenship.
  • Regardless of whether a person registers using a paper application, using the online application, or at DOL, the application is the same, the questions are the same, the criteria for registering are the same.
  • The first question on a voter registration application specifically asks, “I am a citizen of the United States of America,” and the person must affirmatively answer Yes or No.  If the application is online or at DOL and the applicant answers “No” to that question, the application cannot go forward.  If the answer on a paper application is no, the application is not processed.
  • The voter registration application includes an oath, “I am a citizen of the United States,” which the person must sign.
  • Providing false information on a voter registration application is a felony.
  • The ballot declaration that a voter must sign when voting includes the oath, “I do solemnly swear or affirm under penalty of perjury that I am a citizen of the United States.”  Signing a false declaration is a felony.
  • If a person believes that a voter is not eligible to vote, he or she can file a voter registration challenge against that person to challenge their voter registration.  Since voting is a civil right, the person filing the challenge has to prove that the registered voter is not eligible.
  • Over the past few years, the Legislature has reviewed bills that require proof of citizenship in order to register.  So far, the Legislature has not enacted such legislation because many people do not have a passport or a copy of their birth certificate and therefore would be unable to register to vote and exercise a fundamental civil right.

Although there is no list of citizens to compare against the voter rolls, Secretary Reed has sought access to federal databases that have information about legal aliens.  Two requests were made to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security in 2006 and both were denied.  Additionally, Secretary Reed asked the Consulate General of Mexico for a list of all individuals living in Washington state that have been issued a Matricula Consular card.  Citing privacy protections in the Geneva Convention, the Consul General informed the Secretary that he cannot fulfill the request.

I hope this information helps you understand the protections in place to prevent noncitizens from registering, and thus receiving a ballot.   I also hope you have a better understanding of the challenges in screening the voter rolls for noncitizens who register to vote despite the oath and warning statements included in the registration process.

Thank you,

Shane Hamlin

______________

Shane Hamlin

Co-Director of Elections

Office of the Secretary of State

Telephone: 360-725-5781

Mobile: 360-789-0786

www.vote.wa.gov

 

1 Comment